Mining for gold: Identifying content-related MOOC discussion threads across domains through linguistic modeling

Internet and Higher Education

Volumn 32, Issue , 2017, Pages 11-28

  Wise, Alyssa Friend ^a   Cui, Yi ^a   Jin, WanQi ^a   Vytasek, Jovita ^a  

^a SIMON FRASER UNIVERSITY   (Canada)

Author keywords

Computer mediated communication; Content analysis; Discussion forums; Massive open online courses; Natural language processing; Social interaction

Indexed keywords

CLASSIFICATION (OF INFORMATION); COMPUTATIONAL LINGUISTICS; LINGUISTICS; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING SYSTEMS; PHYSIOLOGY;

COMPUTER MEDIATED COMMUNICATION; CONTENT ANALYSIS; DISCUSSION FORUM; MASSIVE OPEN ONLINE COURSE; NATURAL LANGUAGE PROCESSING; SOCIAL INTERACTIONS;

CURRICULA;

EID: 84982276345     PISSN: 10967516     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.iheduc.2016.08.001     Document Type: Article

References (57)

1. Agrawal, A., Venkatraman, J., Leonard, S., Paepcke, A., YouEDU: Addressing confusion in MOOC discussion forums by recommending instructional video clips. Proceedings of the 8th international conference on education data mining, 2015, 297–304 New York, NY, USA: ACM.
2. Breslow, L., Pritchard, D.E., DeBoer, J., Stump, G.S., Ho, A.D., Seaton, D.T., Studying learning in the worldwide classroom research into edX's first MOOC. Research & Practice In Assessment 8 (2013), 13–25.
3. Brinton, C.G., Chiang, M., Jain, S., Lam, H., Liu, Z., Wong, F.M.F., Learning about social learning in MOOCs: From statistical analysis to generative model. IEEE Transactions on Learning Technologies 7:4 (2014), 346–359, 10.1109/TLT.2014.2337900.
4. Brooks, C., Greer, J., Gutwin, C., The data-assisted approach to building intelligent technology-enhanced learning environments. Larusson, J., Whites, B., (eds.) Learning analytic: From research to practice, 2014, Springer, New York, 123–156.
5. Chan, J.C.C., Hew, K.F., Cheung, W.S., Asynchronous online discussion thread development: Examining growth patterns and peer-facilitation techniques. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 25:5 (2009), 438–452.
6. Chandrasekaran, M.K., Kan, M.Y., Tan, B.C., Ragupathi, K., Learning instructor intervention from MOOC forums: Early results and issues. Proceedings of the 8th international conference on education data mining, 2015, 218–225 New York, NY, USA: ACM.
7. Chaturvedi, S., Goldwasser, D., Daumé, H. III, Predicting instructor's intervention in MOOC forums. Proceedings of the 52nd annual meeting of the association for computational linguistics, 2014, 1501–1511 Baltimore, Maryland, USA: ACL.
8. Cui, Y., Wise, A.F., Identifying content-related threads in MOOC discussion forums. Proceedings of the 2nd ACM conference on learning @ scale, 2015, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 299–303, 10.1145/2724660.2728679.
9. D'Mello, S., Graesser, A., Dynamics of affective states during complex learning. Learning and Instruction 22:2 (2012), 145–157, 10.1016/j.learninstruc.2011.10.001.
10. DeBoer, J., Ho, A.D., Stump, G.S., Breslow, L., Changing “course”: Reconceptualizing educational variables for MOOCs. Educational Researcher 43:2 (2014), 74–84, 10.3102/0013189X14523038.
11. Dowell, N.M., Skrypnyk, O., Joksimović, S., Graesser, A.C., Dawson, S., Gašević, D.,.. Kovanović, V., Modeling learners’ social centrality and performance through language and discourse. Proceedings of the 8th international conference on educational data mining, 2015, IEDMS, Madrid, 205–257.
12. Dringus, L.P., Ellis, T., Using data mining as a strategy for assessing asynchronous discussion forums. Computers & Education 45 (2005), 141–160.
13. Duffy, T.M., Dueber, B., Hawley, C.L., Critical thinking in a distributed environment: A pedagogical base for the design of conferencing (CRLT technical report no.5–98). 1998 Retrieved on February 15th, 2016 http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi = 10.1.1.111.2799&rep = rep1&type = pdf.
14. Feinstein, A.R., Cicchetti, D.V., High agreement but low kappa: I. The problems of two paradoxes. Journal of Clinical Epidemiology 43:6 (1990), 543–549.
15. Ferguson, R., Clow, D., Examining engagement: Analysing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses (MOOCs). Proceedings of the fifth international conference on learning analytics and knowledge, 2015, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 51–58, 10.1145/2723576.2723606.
16. Gašević, D., Dawson, S., Rogers, T., Gašević, D., Learning analytics should not promote one size fits all: The effects of instructional conditions in predicating academic success. The Internet and Higher Education 28 (2016), 68–84, 10.1016/j.iheduc.2015.10.002.
17. Gütl, C., Rizzardini, R.H., Chang, V., Morales, M., Attrition in MOOC: Lessons learned from drop-out students. Learning Technology for Education in Cloud. MOOC and Big Data Communications in Computer and Information Science 446:2014 (2014), 37–48, 10.1007/978-3-319-10671-7_4.
18. Herring, S., Interactional coherence in CMC. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 4(4), 1999, 10.1111/j.1083-6101.1999.tb00106.x.
19. Hew, K.F., Cheung, W.S., Students’ and instructors’ use of massive open online courses (MOOCs): Motivations and challenges. Educational Research Review 12 (2014), 45–58, 10.1016/j.edurev.2014.05.001.
20. Hewitt, J., How habitual online practices affect the development of asynchronous discussion threads. Journal of Educational Computing Research 28:1 (2003), 31–45.
21. Hollands, F.M., Tirthali, D., MOOCs: expectations and reality (report)., 2014 Retrieved from Columbia University, Center for Benefit-Cost Studies of Education website on March 26th, 2015 http://cbcse.org/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2014/05/MOOCs_Expectations_and_Reality.pdf.
22. Huang, J., Dasgupta, A., Ghosh, A., Manning, J., Sanders, M., Superposter behavior in MOOC forums. Proceedings of the 1st ACM conference on learning @ scale, 2014, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 117–126, 10.1145/2556325.2566249.
23. Järvelä, S., Häkkinen, P., Arvaja, M., Leinonen, P., Instructional support in CSCL. Strijbos, J.W., Kirschner, P.A., Martens, R.L., (eds.) What we know about CSCL and implementing it in higher education, 2004, Springer, Netherlands, 115–139.
24. Jiang, Z., Zhang, Y., Liu, C., Li, X., Influence analysis by heterogeneous network in MOOC forums: What can we discover?. Proceedings of the 8th international conference on education data mining, 2015, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 242–249.
25. Khalil, H., Ebner, M., “How satisfied are you with your MOOC?”—A research study on interaction in huge online courses. Proceedings of world conference on educational multimedia, hypermedia and telecommunications 2013, 2013, AACE, Chesapeake, VA, 830–839.
26. Khalil, H., Ebner, M., MOOCs completion rates and possible methods to improve retention—A literature review. Viteli, J., Leikomaa, M., (eds.) Proceedings of EdMedia 2014, 2014, AACE, Chesapeake, VA, 1305–1313.
27. Kim, J., Kang, J.H., Towards identifying unresolved discussions in student online forums. Applied Intelligence 40:4 (2014), 601–612.
28. Kizilcec, R.F., Piech, C., Schneider, E., Deconstructing disengagement: Analyzing learner subpopulations in massive open online courses. Proceedings of the 3rd international conference on learning analytics and knowledge, 2013, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 170–179, 10.1145/2460296.2460330.
29. Kuh, G., From promise to progress: How colleges and universities are using student engagement results to improve collegiate quality. National Survey of Student Engagement Annual Report. 2002, Indiana University, Bloomington, IN.
30. Lerman, K., Hogg, T., Leveraging position bias to improve peer recommendation. PloS One, 9(6), 2014, 10.1371/journal.pone.0098914.
31. Lin, F.R., Hsieh, L.S., Chuang, F.T., Discovering genres of online discussion threads via text mining. Computers & Education 52:2 (2009), 481–495.
32. Makos, A., Lee, K., Zingaro, D., Examining the characteristics of student postings that are liked and linked in a CSCL environment. British Journal of Educational Technology 46:6 (2014), 1281–1294.
33. Manning, C.D., Raghavan, P., Schütze, H., Introduction to information retrieval. 2008, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge.
34. Marbouti, F., Wise, A.F., Starburst: A new graphical interface to support productive engagement with others’ posts in online discussions. Educational Technology Research & Development 64:1 (2016), 87–113.
35. McGuire, R., Building a sense of community in MOOCs. Campus Technology 26:12 (2013), 31–33 Retrieved on November 6th, 2014 https://campustechnology.com/articles/2013/09/03/building-a-sense-of-community-in-moocs.aspx.
36. Moore, M.G., Editorial: Three types of interaction. American Journal of Distance Education 3:2 (1989), 1–7, 10.1080/08923648909526659.
37. Paquette, G., Mariño, O., Rogozan, D., Léonard, M., Competency-based personalization for massive online learning. Smart Learning Environments 2:1 (2015), 1–19.
38. Peters, V.L., Hewitt, J., An investigation of student practices in asynchronous computer conferencing courses. Computers & Education 54:4 (2010), 951–961, 10.1016/j.compedu.2009.09.030.
39. Rafaeli, S., Kent, C., Network-structured discussions for collaborative concept mapping and peer learning. IBM Journal of Research and Development, 59(6), 2015, 10.1147/JRD.2015.2461091 7 – 7:13.
40. Reich, J., Rebooting MOOC research. Science 347:6217 (2015), 34–35.
41. Rossi, L.A., Gnawali, O., Language independent analysis and classification of discussion threads in Coursera MOOC forums. Proceedings of 2014 IEEE 15th international conference on information reuse and integration, 2014, 654–661, 10.1109/IRI.2014.7051952 IEEE.
42. Scardamalia, M., CSILE/knowledge forum®. Kovalchick, A., Dawson, K., (eds.) Education and technology: An encyclopedia, 2004, ABC-CLIO, Santa Barbara, CA, 183–192.
43. Scardamalia, M., Bereiter, C., Knowledge building and knowledge creation: Theory, pedagogy and technology. Sawyer, R.K., (eds.) The Cambridge handbook of the learning sciences, 2014, Cambridge University Press, New York, 397–417.
44. Schellens, T., Van Keer, H., De Wever, B., Valcke, M., Tagging thinking types in asynchronous discussion groups: Effects on critical thinking. Interactive Learning Environments 17:1 (2009), 77–94.
45. Shah, D., MOOCs in 2015: Breaking down the numbers. EdSurge news, 2015 Retrieved on June 9th, 2016 https://www.edsurge.com/news/2015-12-28-moocs-in-2015-breaking-down-the-numbers.
46. Stephens-Martinez, K., Hearst, M.A., Fox, A., Monitoring MOOCs: Which information sources do instructors value? Proceedings of the 1st ACM conference on learning@ scale (pp. 79–88). 2014, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 10.1145/2556325.2566246.
47. Stump, G.S., DeBoer, J., Whittinghill, J., Breslow, L., Development of a framework to classify MOOC discussion forum posts: Methodology and challenges. Proceedings of NIPS 2013 workshop on data driven education, 2013 Retrieved on November 11th, 2014 http://tll.mit.edu/sites/default/files/library/Coding_a_MOOC_Discussion_Forum.pdf.
48. Thomas, M.J.W., Learning within incoherent structures: The space of online discussion forums. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning 18:3 (2002), 351–366, 10.1046/j.0266-4909.2002.03800.x.
49. Tomkin, J.H., Charlevoix, D., Do professors matter?: Using an a/b test to evaluate the impact of instructor involvement on MOOC student outcomes. Proceedings of the 1st ACM conference on learning@ scale conference, 2014, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 71–78, 10.1145/2556325.2566245.
50. Trentin, G., The quality-interactivity relationship in distance education. Educational Technology 40:1 (2000), 17–27.
51. Wen, M., Yang, D., Rosé, C.P., Sentiment analysis in MOOC discussion forums: What does it tell us. Proceedings of the 7th international conference on educational data mining (EDM 2014), 2014, 130–137 Retrieved on December 5th, 2015 http://educationaldatamining.org/EDM2014/uploads/procs2014/long%20papers/130_EDM-2014-Full.pdf.
52. Williams, J.J., Li, N., Kim, J., Whitehill, J., Maldonado, S., Pechenizkiy, M.,.. Heffernan, N., The MOOClet framework: Improving online education through experimentation and personalization of modules., 2014 Retrieved on June 21st, 2016 http://ssrn.com/abstract=2523265.
53. Wise, A.F., Marbouti, F., Hsiao, Y., Hausknecht, S., A survey of factors contributing to learners’ “listening” behaviors in asynchronous online discussions. Journal of Educational Computing Research 47:4 (2012), 461–480.
54. Wise, A.F., Speer, J., Marbouti, F., Hsiao, Y., Broadening the notion of participation in online discussions: Examining patterns in learners’ online listening behaviors. Instructional Science 41:2 (2013), 323–343.
55. Yang, D., Adamson, D., Rosé, C., Question recommendation with constraints for massive open online courses. Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on recommender systems, 2014, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 49–56, 10.1145/2645710.2645748.
56. Yang, D., Piergallini, M., Howley, I., Rosé, C., Forum thread recommendation for massive open online courses. Proceedings of the 7th international conference on educational data mining, 2014, ACM, New York, NY, USA, 257–260.
57. Yang, D., Sinha, T., Adamson, D., Rosé, C., Turn on, tune in, drop out: Anticipating student dropouts in massive open online courses. Proceedings of the 2013 NIPS data-driven education workshop, 2013, NIPS Foundation Retrieved on Feburary 12th, 2016 http://lytics.stanford.edu/datadriveneducation/papers/yangetal.pdf.